I bought the June eidition of Harper's specifically for this article by Jared Diamond, who wrote Guns, Germs and Steel(amazon.com), a book I highly recommend. I just got around to reading it (my reading pile requires architectural supports at this point), but I highly recommend it.

Human needs and a healthy environment are not opposing claims that must be balanced; instead, they are inexorably linked by chains of cause and effect. We need a healthy environment because we need clean water, clean air, wood, and food from the ocean, plus soil and sunlight to grow crops. We need functioning natural ecosystems, with their native species of earthworms, bees, plants, and microbes, to generate and aerate our soils, pollinate our crops, decompose our wastes, and produce our oxygen. We need to prevent toxic substances from accumulating in our water and air and soil. We need to prevent weeds, germs, and other pest species from becoming established in places where they aren't native and where they cause economic damage. Our strongest arguments for a healthy environment are selfish: we want it for ourselves, not for threatened species like snail darters, spotted owls, and Furbish louseworts.

Another popular misconception is that we can trust in technology to solve our problems. Whatever environmental problem you name, you can also name some hoped-for technological solution under discussion. Some of us have faith that we shall solve our dependence on fossil fuels by developing new technologies for hydrogen engines, wind energy, or solar energy. Some of us have faith that we shall solve our food problems with new or soon-to-be-developed genetically modified crops. Some of us have faith that new technologies will succeed in cleaning up the toxic materials in our air, water, soil, and foods without the horrendous cleanup expenses that we now incur.

Those with such faith assume that the new technologies will ultimately succeed, but in fact some of them may succeed and others may not. They assume that the new technologies will succeed quickly enough to make a big difference soon, but all of these major technological changes will actually take five to thirty years to develop and implement--if they catch on at all. Most of all, those with faith assume that new technology won't cause any new problems. In fact, technology merely constitutes increased power, which produces changes that can be either for the better or for the worse. All of our current environmental problems are unanticipated harmful consequences of our existing technology. There is no basis for believing that technology will miraculously stop causing new and unanticipated problems while it is solving the problems that it previously produced.

Not entirely favorable review of Everything and More, the new David Foster Wallace. It's written by someone who I am pretty sure has never read anything by DFW before; anyone who remarks at this point on Wallace abbreviating 'with respect to' as w/r/t is a newbie.

That said, the discussion of the actual contents is illuminating; it would seem that as a popularizer of math Wallace is a great novelist.

Just in case you're just feeling too damn good and want to depress yourself thoroughly: read this.

It is 10 years since the end of apartheid, since the moment when newly democratic South Africa was held up as a beacon of hope to the world. In 1994, this country had the highest rate of rape in the world; that is still true today. South Africa also has the world's highest rate of child rape, 60 a day -- a 400-per-cent increase in reported assaults in the past eight years. Only 5 per cent of perpetrators are convicted.